NATIONAL HUMAN RIGHTS INSTITUTIONS AS A HUMAN RIGHTS PROTECTION MECHANISM: THE CASES OF THE OMBUDSMAN AND HUMAN RIGHTS AND EQUALITY INSTITUTION OF TURKEY The breakdown of applications by their subjects indicates that potential applicants do not perceive the Institution as a mechanism focused on human rights. The concentration of applications in the area of public employees, and the small number of applications related to human rights suggest that the Institution is not as effective as would be expected from a national human rights institution. This also applies to the area of discrimination, and may be related to the recognition or public perception of the Institution. Although there are some missing indicators in the statistics, when the nature of the applications filed with the Institution and those filed with the Constitutional Court and European Court of Human Rights, and the violations claimed in these applications are compared, a difference can be observed. Although the Ombudsman Institution may receive applications regarding various rights, except for the right to a fair trial, the number of applications related to property rights, right to privacy and family life, freedom of speech, right to assembly and demonstration is quite low. Considering that the applying to the Constitutional Court and the ECtHR is very costly and sometimes ineffective due to the long periods involved, it would be a much more effective way to apply to the KDK for violation decisions. It should also be taken into account that the number of cases opened in 2017 was around 815,000 according to judicial statistics and that this figure was at least 530,000 in the last seven years. An important indicator for the institutional development of the KDK is the accessibility of its decisions. In the past, the Institution published a limited number of selected decisions on its website, but it started a search engine application in 2020. Although this is a new application, as of 31.08.2020, 2789 decisions of the Authority were accessible. However, these decisions are not all the decisions of the Institution; 1570 of them are related to applications that were filed in 2019. Only two of the applications dated 2016 are accessible through this search engine. None of the applications filed before 2016 are available on this search engine.11 Of the published decisions, 1021 are recommendations, and 751 are partial recommendations. D. ANALYSIS OF APPLICATIONS CLAIMING DISCRIMINATION AND CERTAIN DECISIONS In response to the information request made by AMER on this matter, the Ombudsman Institution stated as follows: “Between 1 January 2018 and 15 July 2019, 203 applications claiming discrimination were filed. 151 of these applications were aimed at remedying the grievances resulting from discrimination based on religious belief during the 28 February process, and 127 of the applicants were women. Recommendation-decisions were issued in response to these applications, and these decisions which were made in three different groups due to differences in the situations of the administrations subject to the application as well as the applicants, are hereby attached ”. The reply of the Institution also provides as follows:, “Examination of the applications claiming discrimination reveals that 153 of them are based on religious beliefs, 23 on gender, 15 on disability, 4 on sexual orientation, 3 on political opinions, 2 on discrimination between formal education and remote education, 1 on age, 1 on ethnic origin, and 1 on ex-convictions.” 11 Still, it has been possible to access decisions made by the Institution in 2016 and published on its website. For instance, the decision on the application related to attestation of a diploma, discussed below, was accessed from the website, not through the search engine: https://ombudsman.gov.tr/2016-yili-kararlari/index.html 67